Custer chronicle. [volume] (Custer City, Black Hills, D.T. [S.D.]) 1880-1890, 1887-09-17
The HADDOCK H0hICIDE.
Synopsis Of the Evidence in the Munch-
rath Case.
Harry Leayitt OH the Stand and Repeats
the Story Of the Conspiracy.

CLICK MunchratD, indicted Tor c0n-
spiracy to murder Rev. George Had
dock, began on Wednesday. On Tues
day the following jurors were empanel-
led:
James Collins, f. c. Zingey, S. ID.
McDsugal, VIM. Hall, A. j. Willard,
S. ii. Moore, j. Jauron, 5. ID. Sanford,
G. K. Kountz, NJ. Goodrich, Charles
Armitage and K. w. Yockey.
On Friday the prosecution made the
opening statements. The examination
OF witnesses WAS then begun. Follow
ing are the speeches of E.. III. Hubbard,
for the state, and Mr.. Argo, of LeMars,
for the defense:
Gentlemen of the jury-It is made
my duty on behalf of the state to pre-
sent in advance a statement Of the
evidence upon which the prosecution
expects to rely to make their case. THe
then read The Indictment detailing the
crime, with which the public are sutfic.
ieEtly we'll acquainted. At the CON
clusion of the reading of the indictment
he said: That it was expected that 1t
would be shown that Fred Munchrath
on the night Of. and prior 70 the day Of
the murder did combine in a conspiracy
to comwit murder. That in pursuance
OF the conspiracy he was followed from
place to place until met at the corner
OF 4th and Water street, and in the
HaddOck was slain. We expect that
the evidence Will be established before
you beg ond any possible question. Let
me trace the character of the evidence,
showing the formation Of such design,
and the combination o. several persona.
for the purpose of inilic ing bodily in
jury ON M. Haddock. Mr.. Hub
bard then detailed the passage
Of the Clarke law and
stated its power. The law had SUM
bcred mere until 1886. when it was re-
viyed and Mr.. HtdGock became the
leader and an important witness, Civ
ing evidence against the places prose-
cuted. The trials were taking place
before his honor, judge Lewis. A
feeling of intense excitement commence
ed to peryade the public, and those
engagei in the lquor business were
particularly SO excited. A meeting WAS
had at Hollenrei rs Hall for
the purpose of stopping the
action of Mr.. Haddock. A
committee Of five was appointed to act.
Harry Leavitt was one, and the defend
ant another. Leayitt will be introduced
as a witness. A person was named To
do certain WORK, AID on the following
day Leavitt, Munchrath and Trieber
asked a man named Moriarity to do
certain work, but he refused. Another
person was then found. Ga the even
ing of the murder two men were di-
rected TO watch for Mr.. Htddock at
his house. They could not find
the house, but discovered that Haddock
had gone out in Il buggy and W - rec
ognized. The two men were told 10 90
to the livery stable and lie in wait tor
Hiddock. Some other men hired a
hack and, driving to the Greenvillc
house, made inquiries about Mr.. Had
dock. About this time a hack was
stopped in which u gentleman was
seated, but with the remark: This is
not the man. and told the hack to
drive on. Mr.. Hubbard then detailed
the reports Of the men made at Junk's
saloon. The defendant was one Of
these men. He was one of the men
who stopped the hack at the corner of
Pearl and Fourth streets. One OF the
men who was tod to lie in wait at the
livery stable il the defendant. One of
the men who left Junk's saloon and
mont .o tho QUA ~ l. ,,,tl 49, w..
streets for the purpose of iniuring Mir.
Haddock is the defendant and proving
these facts beyond contradiction we ex-
pect "a verdict Of gGilty.'
o II DEFENSE.
The opening address for the
defense was by Mr.. Argo.
The jury while it was being delivered.
listened a~ttent!vely. 1t was as follows:
May it please the court and YOU gen
gentlemen of the jury: The duty of
making the opening statement on the
part of the defendant has been assigned
to me. You have heard the able coun-
sci representing the state read the in
dictment, and you know the nature of
the serious charge made therein against
INC ucItubill. Iuc utltIutUt = pea
il not guilty. This Plea puts in issue
the truth Of every material allegation
in tire indictment. The plea Of not
guilty IS n denial Of the truth of every
allegation in the ilictment. Therefore
it is incumbent on the state to prove
the defendant guilty beyond every rea-
sonable doubt. The defendant stands
before you rs an innocent man, he is
presumed innocent until proven guilty
beyond every reasonable doubt. The
oath you have taken requires that you
shall SO consider him; this has been
the law ever since the establishment Of
the right Of triah by jury. The defend
ant is not required to prove his inno-
cence; the burden of proving him
guilty rests on the prosecution. The
fact that a grand jury has indicted him
does not create a presumption of guilt.
Counsel for the state. in his opening
statement, gave you a brief outline Of
the testimony he expects to introduce
before you in support of the Indictment.
He told you that they would be able
NJ